I wasn't arguing whether or not he is the best in the league (although I would say he is probably the best, just ahead of Valencia , and I imagine this time next year Alexander-Arnold will be in that discussion too), only that the evidence you used doesn't stand up to scrutiny whatsoever.
Dismissing him as nothing more than power and pace is completely unfair - he is good technically, intelligent and, after a long time where this was the last thing you could say about him, he is consistent and reliable. He doesn't really have a mistake in him the way he used to.
There's clearly nothing that can be said to convince you that he's any good, so I'll boil it down to this - City were a country mile better this year than they were last year, and Walker was a big part of that improvement. Not the only part by any means, and not even the biggest part, but he played a major role in turning City from also-rans to dominant force. He is an exceptionally good, modern wing-back who controls the entire flank and he is streets ahead of Trippier and Aurier - although I think that Aurier has the same problems with concentration and consistencyWalker used to have, and with a couple of years under Pochettino he could be as good or better, if he shows the same dedication and effort Walker did. It is not a coincidence that we were slightly worse this year having lost him, and City were much better having signed him.
I disagree with a lot of that. Walker is not very good technically, and certainly lacks in footballing intelligence. Walker still makes plenty of mistakes but usually, not always, manages to correct them because of his pace. I agree with you that I would still rather have him as RB than any of our current ones because of his pace and work ethic.